Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
State-Licensed Ministers Can't Pray Away the Gay, SCOTUS Affirms
http://religiondispatches.org/state-licensed-ministers-cant-pray-away-the-gay-scotus-affirms/The Supreme Court’s refusal to consider an appeal of California’s 2012 ban on conversion therapy is the clearest sign yet that even a Neil Gorsuch Court is unwilling to allow religious practitioners to engage in objectively harmful behavior—at least when it comes to minors whose care has been entrusted to licensed mental health professionals.
The summary rejection of the appeal effectively affirms the lower court’s ruling that California’s law was narrowly tailored—impacting only therapists and counselors licensed by the state—and furthered the state interest of protecting minors from a “treatment” proven wholly ineffective and actually dangerous to the already-at-risk population at which such “therapy” is aimed.
The Court’s decision bodes well for the six other states (and Washington, D.C.) which have adopted their own statutory bans on conversion therapy, largely modeled after the California legislation. Notably, all of those laws limit the restriction on “conversion therapy” to state-licensed practitioners working with minor clients. Adults hoping to “pray away the gay” are still legally free to do so in all 50 states.
In fact, even the California minister who filed suit is free to practice the debunked “therapy”—he just can’t engage minors in the practice, and can’t represent himself as a state-licensed therapist offering that treatment. In his ministerial duties he is free to preach about the power of prayer (or, in some cases, more nefarious tactics) to “rescue” people from the bonds of queerness. But what he can’t do, according to the newly affirmed precedent, is claim that his “religious beliefs” trump actual science and the overwhelming findings of peer-reviewed research about the efficacy of such tactics. That’s a major victory for common sense, and anyone who believes in the power of empirical study to identify the real impact of any controversial treatment.
The summary rejection of the appeal effectively affirms the lower court’s ruling that California’s law was narrowly tailored—impacting only therapists and counselors licensed by the state—and furthered the state interest of protecting minors from a “treatment” proven wholly ineffective and actually dangerous to the already-at-risk population at which such “therapy” is aimed.
The Court’s decision bodes well for the six other states (and Washington, D.C.) which have adopted their own statutory bans on conversion therapy, largely modeled after the California legislation. Notably, all of those laws limit the restriction on “conversion therapy” to state-licensed practitioners working with minor clients. Adults hoping to “pray away the gay” are still legally free to do so in all 50 states.
In fact, even the California minister who filed suit is free to practice the debunked “therapy”—he just can’t engage minors in the practice, and can’t represent himself as a state-licensed therapist offering that treatment. In his ministerial duties he is free to preach about the power of prayer (or, in some cases, more nefarious tactics) to “rescue” people from the bonds of queerness. But what he can’t do, according to the newly affirmed precedent, is claim that his “religious beliefs” trump actual science and the overwhelming findings of peer-reviewed research about the efficacy of such tactics. That’s a major victory for common sense, and anyone who believes in the power of empirical study to identify the real impact of any controversial treatment.
I'll take whatever good news we can get these days.